Pages

Saturday

Fort Bend Criminal Defense Attorney Jim Sullivan Gets Proven Results

Fort Bend Felony Defense Lawyer Jim Sullivan has represented more than 3,000 clients in criminal and juvenile courts in Fort Bend County Texas and surrounding counties. The Trial Cases listed in the graph below and the detailed accounts that follow the graph represent just a fraction of those by Jim Sullivan. The cases listed in the graph cover just those that were set for trial between January 2008 to April 2012. A graph covering the trial cases represented since 1994 would be too lengthy to post. However, all of the criminal cases (which have not been sealed or expunged) can be verified with their case number through the website of the county district clerk.

Sullivan is appreciative of his clients that write reviews. You can call Sullivan at 281-546-6428.

I recommend Mr. Sullivan 100% to anyone trying to get the best result in their felony case. I was very impressed with his professionalism and care. He was never late to any of my court settings and he gave me good advice on what to do to help my case. He soon became more than a lawyer and more like a friend by being there for me on my struggles with my case and life.

I was charged with aggravated assault of a family member with a firearm. My case was a really bad one, but Mr. Sullivan was able to get the best result possible. I expected to get 15 years or more in prison, but at the end of everything he worked out a deal for a misdemeanor where I only spent four months in Harris County jail. This was a slap on the hand compared to what I expected.

Mr. Sullivan was very diligent in his work and knew what he was doing at all times. He even speaks really good Spanish and was able to communicate with my sister since she doesn't speak English well. I recommend Mr. Sullivan to anyone looking for a professional, responsible, caring, smart, and effective lawyer. He really cares for his clients and that's something that is hard to find nowadays. He even helped me with a great payment plan. He is worth way more than what he asked me for and I am greatly appreciative for his work, professionalism, and friendship. He is a very smart person and he is always giving advice for life betterment. I really admire him and don’t have anything negative to say. He is so humble and a great person to be around. He knows the law like the palms of his hands and even on the first day he prognosticated what the prosecutor’s offer was going to be (15 years TDC) and what he was going to get it down to (1 year HCJ) and he did it even though I thought it was impossible. Thank God for people like him, thanks to him I'm done with all my problems now and I'm thankful to him for everything he did, thank you Mr. Sullivan. Sincerely, M. Delagarza(Avvo review)

CASE #

CT #

TEXAS CRIMINAL OFFENSE

ACTUAL RESULTS IN 2012

1319150

337th

FAILURE TO COMPLY W/ SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION (SJF)

TRIAL SETTING: SENTENCED TO 2 YEARS TDC AFTER ORIGINALLY FACING 25 YEARS TO LIFE IN PRISON(Client agreed to the minimum on an enhanced state jail felony habitual offender)

1319350

337TH

INDECENCY WITH A CHILD BY EXPOSURE (3°)

PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE: RECEIVED 2 YEARS DEFERRED ADJUDICATION PROBATION AFTER FACING 5 YEARS TO LIFE IN PRISON ON A FELONY ENHANCED TO A 1° FELONY

1306891

339th

ROBBERY (2° Felony)

JURY TRIAL SETTING: REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR ASSAULT(Client accused of stealing cell phone after attacking his girlfriend)(State only offered 4 years in prison before trial)

CASE #

CT #

TEXAS CRIMINAL OFFENSE

ACTUAL RESULTS IN 2011

926980

337th

MOTION TO ADJUDICATE GUILT (THEFT)(SJF)

PROBATION REVOCATION HEARING: REVOKED AND SENTENCED TO TIME SERVED(100 days HCJ under §12.44a after first facing 6 months to 2 years in state jail)(Client had a reasonable due diligence argument regarding the failure of the police to arrest the defendant soon after the violation of probation)

1736017

7

ASSAULT FAMILY VIOLENCE

JURY TRIAL SETTING: DISMISSED BY STATE(Client allegedly committed an assault against her spouse)

1281492 & 1281493

174th

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT (2°)

JURY TRIAL SETTING: SENTENCED TO 5 YEARS TDC AFTER FACING 5 YEARS TO LIFE IN PRISON(1° Felony enhanced from 2° Felony based on prior penitentiary trips)(State only offered 10 years prior to trial)

1287564

174th

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT (2° Felony)

PSI HEARING: RECEIVED DADJ PROBATION (Client with mental illness stabbed his girlfriend in the arm and upper back. State only offered prison time. Complainant also testified.)

1072069

178TH

SEXUAL ASSAULT (2° Felony)

JURY TRIAL: JURY FOUND CLIENT GUILTY AND RECOMMENDED PROBATION(Client received 5 years of probation. Prior to trial, State only offered 5 years at TDC. Client was convicted of sexually assaulting a woman in the year 2000)

JURY TRIAL SETTING: SENTENCED TO 6 MONTHS STATE JAIL AFTER FACING 2-20 YEARS IN TDC AS A STATE JAIL FELONY HABITUAL OFFENDER

1185502

179TH

ROBBERY (4 separate cases)(Felony Habitual)

JURY TRIAL SETTING: SENTENCED TO 10 YEARS TDC AFTER FACING 25 YEARS TO LIFE IN PRISON(Client was on parole and still had 10 years of parole left. Client allegedly committed 4 separate robberies within 48 hours of being released on parole after serving 15 years of a 25 year sentence for a burglary of a habitation)

AGGRAVATED ROBBERY
Jim Sullivan represented a 25 year old man accused of 2 separate armed robberies, including a home invasion across the street from the South Houston Police Department. The chief of police and another police officer testified in trial that they positively identified Jim’s client as one of the three armed robbers who fled on foot from the scene. The police initially suspected Jim’s client because his vehicle was left behind at the scene. After the jury returned a not guilty verdict, the prosecutor dismissed the second aggravated robbery. If convicted of either robbery case, the accused faced 25 years to life in prison. Jim then represented his client at a parole revocation hearing and his client was kept on parole.VERDICT: NOT GUILTY

NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE
Jim Sullivan defended a 21 year old man accused of killing a young man in a head-on car accident on Eldridge Parkway in northwest Houston. The accused allegedly had traces of cocaine in his system, was driving over the speed limit in the rain, on the wrong side of the road, and with “bald” tires. The force of the impact caused the engine from one of the cars to be ejected and thrown about 50 feet from the car. Unfortunately, the sports car the decedent was driving did not have air bags, and the driver was killed instantly when his head hit the steering wheel.
The accused denied using drugs and testified he was on his way to work for a local service station. The accused had auto insurance. Jim hired a drug toxicologist expert who conducted his own lab tests and questioned the validity of the blood tests conducted by the Houston Police Lab. Photographs of the accused’s tires reflected that they had sufficient tread and the inspection sticker was current on his car. Due to the heavy rain, his car hydroplaned across lanes and struck the decedent’s car head on. A witness testified he was going 5-10 miles above the speed limit. To be guilty of negligent homicide, Jim argued to the jury, requires gross negligence and not simple negligence. After about 10 minutes of deliberation, the jury returned a not guilty verdict.VERDICT: NOT GUILTY

AGGRAVATED SEXUAL ASSAULT OF A CHILD
Jim Sullivan represented a 40 year old man accused in two cases of sexually assaulting his 6 year old daughter in Montgomery County. The accusations arose one week after the accused contacted an attorney to file for divorce. The outcry witness, the child’s mother, had threatened her husband not to leave her or he would never see his children again. By viewing the child’s videotaped interview from the Children’s Assessment Center and carefully observing her demeanor, body language and the manner in which she responded to the questions of the forensic interviewer, Jim could tell that the child had been coached. Jim also interviewed several witnesses who corroborated the motivation for the mother to file false charges.JURY TRIAL SETTING: BOTH CASES DISMISSED

BURGLARY OF A HABITATION
Jim Sullivan represented a 14 year old boy who–along with six others–was accused of breaking into a home and stealing a safe containing about $15,000 in cash. A police officer arrested his client, took him to the police station and obtained a signed confession from him. Jim’s client said the officer browbeat a false confession out of him and that he was actually swimming at a YMCA at the time of the burglary. In addition to his alibi witnesses, Jim also subpoenaed to trial the five teenagers who had actually committed the crime and who were already on probation.VERDICT: NOT GUILTY

ASSAULT
Jim Sullivan represented a large 13 year old boy accused of attacking his behavioral adjustment teacher and seriously injuring her in the hallway outside her classroom. The Houston Press covered the trial in an article entitled “School Scam? Did a teacher fabricate a student assault to collect disability?” After finding his client not guilty, the jury asked Jim how charges could be filed against the teacher for perjury and insurance fraud.VERDICT: NOT GUILTY

POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE
Jim Sullivan represented a 13 year old girl accused of possession between 1-4 grams of cocaine. She was at an apartment with her boyfriend and two other teenage couples. One of the couples got into a fight. That girl called a friend who in turn called the police. When a police officer arrived at the door, that couple jumped out the back window and ran away. The officer entered the apartment without a warrant, claiming he heard what he thought were the sounds of a body being dragged across the floor. In a suppression hearing, Jim elicited from the officer that he did not hear any such sounds at all. Hence, there was no valid emergency to justify his warrantless search and seizure. The judge granted Jim’s motion to suppress evidence of the possession.SUPPRESSION HEARING: CASE DISMISSED

AGGRAVATED SEXUAL ASSAULT OF A CHILD
Jim Sullivan represented a 34 year old pregnant woman who–along with her live-in boyfriend–was charged with sexually assaulting her 12 year old daughter. The daughter was interviewed on two separate occasions at the Children’s Assessment Center. In the first interview, the girl said that her mother was involved, but in her second interview, she suggested that her mother was not involved. Jim attended the trial of her boyfriend who was represented by another attorney and was found guilty by the jury. Jim was prepared to represent the mother at trial the following week.JURY TRIAL SETTING: FELONY CASES DISMISSED ON THIRD JURY TRIAL SETTING

AGGRAVATED SEXUAL ASSAULT OF A CHILD
Jim Sullivan represented a 19 year old man accused of repeatedly molesting his 14 year old half- sister over a period of several years. In the same videotaped interview at the Children’s Assessment Center, the half-sister also accused her uncle of raping her at his mobile home while his wife was outside attending a party. Her physical exam came back as normal. Through a thorough investigation, Jim was able to show that the complainant had falsely accused at least one other teenager of sexually assaulting her. Jim was also able to show clear bias and other motivation for her false charges.JURY TRIAL SETTING: CASE DISMISSED

SEXUAL ASSAULT
Jim Sullivan represented a 16 year old boy accused of raping a 17 year old girl at her home. After a lengthy investigation, Jim was able to cast doubt on the credibility of his accuser in several ways, including the fact that his client did attend football practice at the time that his accuser claimed that he had followed her home and raped her.JURY TRIAL SETTING: CASE DISMISSED AT A PRE-TRIAL HEARING SETTING

AGGRAVATED SEXUAL ASSAULT OF A CHILD & INDECENCY WITH A CHILD
Jim Sullivan represented a 16 year old boy accused of molesting his six year old half-sister. After a thorough investigation of the home environment, Jim was able to show that–if the girl had been molested–the stepfather, a convicted drug user, was the likely perpetrator.JURY TRIAL SETTING: FELONY CASES REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR ASSAULT

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT AGAINST A PUBLIC SERVANT (POLICE OFFICER)
Jim Sullivan represented a deranged woman who walked up to a police officer in a grocery store and lunged at him with a butcher knife. Fortunately, the officer was able to subdue and arrest her without either of them being physically injured. It was soon learned that the woman had a lengthy documented history of mental illness. In the first hearing, Jim persuaded a jury to find his client incompetent to stand trial with no substantial likelihood of regaining competency. His client was then committed to a state hospital for treatment. In a later court trial, Jim persuaded the court to find his client not guilty by reason of insanity.TRIAL SETTING: NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF INSANITY

INDECENCY WITH A CHILD
Jim Sullivan represented a 14 year old boy accused of touching a 13 year old girl in her genital area against her will behind the bleachers in the school gymnasium. After interviewing several eyewitnesses and taking photos of the scene, Jim was able to cast doubt on the girl’s version of events.JURY TRIAL SETTING: FELONY CASE REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR ASSAULT

FELONY THEFT
Jim Sullivan represented a middle-aged businessman accused of felony theft for allegedly fencing over $60,000 in stolen inventory from a local business. Through an intensive investigation, Jim learned that the co-defendant knowingly sold the inventory at a steep discount through his client to a distributor who had to have known the inventory was stolen. Jim was able to present his client as a naive broker who only received $8,000 in what he thought was a legitimate fee from the transaction. On the second trial setting, the State agreed to reduce the charges to a misdemeanor, allow his client to receive deferred adjudication probation so that he would not receive a conviction, and allow his client to pay back only $8,000 in restitution.JURY TRIAL SETTING: FELONY REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR ON SECOND TRIAL SETTING

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT
Jim Sullivan represented a woman who was accused of biting off her ex-boyfriend’s tongue. Through an investigation, Jim was able to show that she probably acted in self-defense as he was attempting to rape her while high on drugs.JURY TRIAL SETTING: FELONY REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR AT PRE-TRIAL SETTING

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT
Jim Sullivan represented a 40 year old woman who allegedly stabbed her wheel-chair bound husband in the chest with a kitchen knife. The woman had a long history of mental illness and allegedly had stabbed him on a previous occasion. Through a lengthy investigation, Jim learned that he had a lengthy crack cocaine addiction and had been brain-injured in a prior car accident. Jim was prepared to present a compelling justification argument of self-defense.JURY TRIAL SETTING: FELONY REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR AT PRE-TRIAL SETTING

ASSAULT AGAINST A POLICE OFFICER & EVADING BY MOTOR VEHICLE
Jim Sullivan represented a 16 year old boy who was accused of two felony charges: Assault on a Police Officer for allegedly striking an undercover police officer with his car and Evading by Motor Vehicle for continuing to drive away. At the jury trial, Jim argued that his client had just been jumped by two teens and was trying to drive away when a guy walked up with a gun drawn that he believed was trying to car jack him. The gun man was an undercover police officer who flashed his ID card and identified himself. In his pain and confusion, his client understandably did not believe him and drove off. The passenger side mirror on his car struck the officer. After several hours of deliberation, the jury could not reach a verdict. The State then agreed to dismiss the felony assault charge, reduce the felony evading case to a misdemeanor and let his client receive deferred prosecution so that he would not receive a conviction.VERDICT: HUNG JURY

ROBBERY (4 CASES)
Jim Sullivan represented a 40 year old man with a lengthy felony criminal record dating back 15 years. His client had a severe drug problem. He previously had served 8 years of a 25 year sentence as a habitual felon for burglary of a habitation. Two days after being released from prison on a drug case, he was arrested on four cases of robbery and was suspected in at least four other cases. He allegedly snatched purses from women causing minor injuries while driving his father’s truck which, along with him, was later identified by witnesses. Facing 25 to Life as a habitual felon for the second time, he opted for trial. He had 10 years left on his parole.JURY TRIAL SETTING: 10 YEARS TDC AFTER FACING 25 YEARS TO LIFE IN TDC